Blog 2213 — Garden of Eden: Three Roots


Rooted who knows how far back in human history, men and women are born 1) willing and able to be compatible as mates, 2) with a dominant gender to drive the bus and a superior gender to indirectly guide the driver, and 3) with men enabled men to find satisfaction and women to pursue happiness.

1) Two Loves. The glue of compatibility starts with two very different forms of love that have to be bonded into an agreeable form, which is unattainable except under management of a relationship expert.

Her Love. Women expect to keep their mate by demonstrating their love with words and actions; it’s energized by their nature of loving to love someone. In return she expects him to display all manner of loving attention as she defines love—most prominently as displays of affection—which she transmutes into her importance in life.

His Love. Men expect to keep their mate through his loyalty to her and her likeability to him. In return he expects her to display actions—much more than words—that he interprets as her loyalty to him and his likeability to her.

IOW, he expects to receive the reverse of what he gives. She expects the same as what she gives. They differ fundamentally, which is why the glue of compatibility requires a relationship expert to get it to bond.

2) Superior Sex vs. Dominant Sex. On the macro scale of human behavior, we see a superior sex and irresistible force versus a dominant sex and immovable object. However, God designs the genders such that the immovable becomes moveable with irresistible female leveraging of sexual availability. That is, men do whatever women require in order for men to have frequent and convenient access to sex.

On the other hand, the irresistible female force becomes resistible under the influence of masculine strength to get what men want. Women do whatever men require in order for women to enjoy the fruits of manly producing, providing, protecting, and problem solving on behalf of women and children.

It’s a swap meet. Irresistible and immovable both yield voluntarily to reciprocal loyalty and likeability when surrounded by affirmation, accommodation, and affection. Consequently, their competing powers balance and cooperate to form compatibly successful relationships under management of relationship experts.

3) Two Opposites. Much unwarranted marital turmoil arises from this sex difference.

Her Happiness. Women are born to be happy but they have to earn it. She does it by making herself important to others, which returns to magnify her sense of self-importance and self-gratitude, which enables her to find more ways to be important and grateful, which is her main pathway to happiness. The more grateful she is, the happier she is.

His Satisfaction. Men are born to be satisfied but they have to earn it. Unfortunately as women see it, men earn satisfaction at their work. Hence, daily parking of himself after work with TV, beer, and clicker while she continues working till bedtime in order to keep herself feeling important and grateful.

You can see evidence daily of how Feminism, politics, and pop culture combine to rip the heart from those three ancient roots of human behavior. 1) Men are never affectionate enough for women. Women purposely make themselves unlikeable to men by getting in their man’s face arguing to get their way. 2) Women give away sexual favors, which removes the primary incentive that causes men to provide and protect a woman and her children. 3) Women are overworked because men do nothing after their workday ends and all the associated ‘crimes’ that flow from that concept of the female being thus victimized.

Oh, well, that’s enough complaining. We still have the historic background for compatibility for couples, counterbalancing gender powers, satisfaction for men, and happiness for women. The roots linger in the hearts of many women, but so few are standing up for it out of fear of feminist condemnation.

10 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter, sex difference

10 responses to “Blog 2213 — Garden of Eden: Three Roots

  1. Eric

    Sir Guy:
    I have a question somewhat related to this. The news reported today reported a huge cultural defeat as so-called ‘gay marriage’ was ratified in Ireland. While I know that the Sexual Anarchists and Cultural Marxists have been aggressively promoting homosexuality through the pop culture, I wonder why modern women seem so tolerant of it?

    Especially among younger women, there seems to be not only a tolerance of it, but considerable experimenting with it and bisexuality. I remember when I was in high school (1980s) the girls had no tolerance for it at all. I can somewhat understand it in males (a perverted way of access to frequent and convenient sex); but I can’t see at all how it squares with the female nature to either support it or in engage in it. What are your thoughts?

    Sir Eric,

    You ignited a trash fire. Would that it all burn away so easily.

    Women, especially the youngest, are lost. They have forgotten what’s right for women vis-à-vis men because they’ve been doing what’s wrong for so long. Examples, and our culture is 6 or 7 like-minded generations deep and growing deeper into these bad habits:

    1. Females chase males and expect men to help fulfill their girlhood hopes and dreams. In effect, the chase tells men that her hopes and dreams must be as foolish as she is.

    2. Women deny men the opportunity to act like good, upstanding, responsible men. So men find something else to do. Why not chase sex? Mating is both unappealing and easily escapable,

    3. Women act irresponsibly as sellers and expect men to be reliable buyers in the relationship marketplace.

    4. Women as the natural relationship experts use faulty judgment for building relationships and so they end up with the same faultiness for managing relationships.

    5. Women yield sex indiscriminately and see no ill effects that trickle down to pubescents and pre-teens participating and what that means for their children and grandchildren. Not wanting to ever be blamed for something as egregious as raising kids who are less than great, they steer away from having babies, which frustrates their mothering instinct and significantly reduces their importance in life, which prevents them from doing their best to follow their primal motivation of generating and continually confirming their sense of self-importance, which makes them of less importance to men, which means they don’t show the gratitude that women need to be happy in life.

    6. Wives criticize husbands in public and expect newfound obedience rather than resentment or revenge.

    7. They act in common with other women without regard for men who seek a unique woman to mate and virtuous woman to marry. By looking and acting more alike as women acting like men, they expect to impress men with their virtue aka traits that a man admires. Men don’t admire masculine traits, features, or behaviors in women.

    8. Women think—and girls learn—that their vagina is unique and expect to use it to get what they want and they all do it in concert, which destroys uniqueness. All vaginas are alike in the first place to the next and the last small head.

    9. They give up on their natural makeup and expect to catch up by acting more like men. But they’re unsure of what it is they should catch up to or with. Confusion dominates the serious side of their thinking.

    10. They live up to nothing bigger than boyfriend/fiancé/husband, which puts them down on the social/domestic ladder to where they can’t see the top rung that they should in fact be dominating. They defer to men just as soon as their man insists on his way or the highway. Having learned nothing, they do it again and again.

    11. They make themselves so important taking proper care of their children that they silently dictate that their man should leave, and he does. It’s typical when she makes him play second fiddle.

    12. They think that giving their heart to another human will fulfill their lives, whether it be boyfriend, husband, or children. But it doesn’t, does it? They are created to make themselves important to others by giving of themselves; not giving their hearts away in hope of reciprocity.

    13. They spend time and effort to raise good kids instead of raising kids to be good adults. And so they send unqualified kids into puberty where their minds and hearts are twisted and misshapen into lousy adults.

    That baker’s dozen will do for now.

    I’ll end with this. Women don’t think for themselves. They’ve been dumbed down by faulty education, following the IN crowd, adapting to feminist thought, following dominant men of the pop culture, and believing leftist politicians who claim to stop one thing but actually perpetuate it, such as the various wars on women, drugs, racism, conventional marriage (and its natural extension of moral standards) and several other political strategies made effective by victimizing multiple groups.

    Guy

    • Tooconfused

      Sir guy explains it well but for a percentage of women there is also a lot of faking involved with “gay marriage” support. (Nobody here should get offended as I don’t have a problem with gay relationships. But I don’t support gay marriages as I feel it makes a parody of marriage itself for straight relationships.)

      Main reason is that I truly feel lucky my parents were man and woman and that I was raised with them. I would be sad or horrified if both my parents were men or women. Two moms or two dads? I just wouldn’t like that as a child. It’s hard enough to fit in and act normally with an age group, and to have to add a layer of homosexual parenting to it? Especially if I’m straight?

      Anyway, by “fake” I mean that I’ll just agree with people when I don’t – because I have experienced social isolation from expressing my true opinions. Simply asking, why can’t gays just be “life partners”, why must they demand marriage? At the office I consider it forbidden to share such conservative views. People don’t want to hear them. It’s all about giving love to transgenders and gays right now. I am scared one day I wake up and I am a pariah for sticking to the sex I was born with (female) and for being attracted to men.

      So basically what I’m saying is that there are a good chunk of us born in the 80s (last vestige of proper parenthood and conservative beliefs for some) who don’t agree with these laws but we’re simply not expressing them in public because to do so means people will hate you or call you a hater. If you are a christian you have an excuse but if you are atheist and still hold conservative views people just don’t like it. I still can’t count how many times I’ve been shamed for choosing to be chaste around my friends so now I just pretend like I’m “one of them”. It’s just easier than trying to explain biomechanics and human nature to a table of women who went to ivy league schools and took some liberal arts classes. Trust me you don’t want to be stuck in a round table with women like this chewing your face off the entire night.

      It’s really frustrating, the media brainwashing. I want to find new friends who think like I do. It’s so so hard. Everyone is all “cool” with these “no gender” “pro gay” marriage etc. The other day on TV there was a “straight” couple on abc news – but both fully went trans. The man in the relationship was born a girl, and the woman in the relationship was born a man! They married. So technically they are in a “straight” relationship but in bodily reverse. And they have two kids. So yes, confusion as a state of mind doesn’t cut it. They put this on prime time news and were featured as a home owning middle class all white 9-5 couple with a white picket fence.

      • Kay

        Sir Guy and Tooconfused, you both are so eloquent and dead on! Sir guy your last paragraph sums up the situation with young women perfectly. They are so misguided and have little or no self respect and many are actually proud of their behavior. Their poor judgement and lack of clarity on how their behavior contributes to our culture’s deterioration makes my skin crawl. Meanwhile the young men are at an incredible buffet and don’t want to push back from the table. Who can blame them?

        Your Highness Kay,

        Their self-respect is missing because their self-love was crippled in childhood. Their faux pride hides it from others but not from themselves, which makes their behavior even worse in order to escape the guilt.

        You’re right, and the spread at the buffet continues to expand at even greater cost to female happiness.

        Guy

        • Eric

          Well, the buffet is relatively speaking.

          If a man is a PUA, a thug, or a guy with looks and money who only cares about getting laid; then yes, it’s a smorgasbord.

          If a man is interested in permanent committed relationship or marriage; then it’s a famine.

          The crippling of self-love that Sir Guy mentions also cripples their ability to relate or bond with men on anything but a superficial level. Lacking respect or love for themselves, they can’t share either with a man.

          Sir Eric,
          Clearly phrased. You’re a thinking man’s kind of thinker.
          Guy

          • That Horse Is Dead

            Sir Eric,

            Do you mean “interested in a permanent committed relationship or marriage” with a woman of character or ability to bond on a deeper, spiritual level? It seems there is famine on both sides so why are we not meeting each other (i.e. Where did all the good men go)? How do you, as a man, seek out a woman of character? By the way, Sir Guy, I had my first chance to use “no ring, no booty” in an online conversation with a man. It was quite fun:)

            Your Highness That Horse is Dead,

            Good for your online use of “no ring, no booty.” It’s a ringer and first credit on this blog goes to Tooconfused.

            However, “Where did all the good men go” is the title of my book avail at top of blog.

            Guy

            • Eric

              Miss THID:
              Yes, that’s the type of man I mean. One of the surprising things I learned from the comments in the ‘Manosphere’ article is that good women were actually having trouble finding good men. I suspect the reason for this that good men have largely become discouraged and aren’t looking for it aggressively, at least not on local levels.

              I’ve mentioned that the majority of today’s men—whether in the Manosphere or not—truly believe that women prefer weak, stupid, and thuggish males to strong, intelligent, and responsible men (I think it’s probably true of the majority of women myself). This really is a greater negative factor in male psychology than women realize. Men really see these types of female choices as a mark of disrespect—not only personally, but disrespectful of masculine qualities in general. Hence I think it’s important for CSWs to highlight their respect for masculine traits to attract men of value (i.e. you have to convince them that you don’t share the societal misandry).

            • That Horse Is Dead

              Yes, I own a copy! That is why I used it for reference:)

      • Eric

        Miss Tooconfused:
        Homosexuals make up only a tiny percentage of the population, but within the Government/Media/Academia Complex, they’re a sizable plurality, if not an outright majority in certain sectors. The Census figures show that they have populations far above the national average in cities where those three occupations predominate.

        I have a suspicion that, besides trying to make converts, the Cultural Marxists are using this as a wedge issue to marginalize and unofficially purge Christians from the social mainstream.

        Sir Eric,
        I confirm your suspicion with my conviction. You have a talent for figuring out cultural pressures, especially those designed to destroy the American culture.
        Guy

        • Eric

          Sir Guy:
          Thank you—yes, people don’t realize today that the French Jacobins, Russian Bolsheviks, Italian Fascists, and German Nazis were full of homosexuals among their leadership. There seems to be a natural affinity between Sexual Anarchism and these types of authoritarian extremist movements.

          Contrary to what pop culture teaches, earlier generations of social scientists understood this connection and homosexuality was suppressed more for social policy reasons than because of supposed religious ‘intolerance’.

          Americans think ‘it can’t happen here’ but already we’re seeing business leaders and university professors purged, small businesses sued, and—though the media doesn’t report it—violent attacks on churches and institutions which are deemed ‘anti-gay’, You’ll notice too that even the churches themselves are splitting off into two factions over this issues—with the media praising the pro-gay churches and condemning the anti-gay ones as ‘haters’. These are all signs of very ominous things on the horizon.

          • Miss Gina

            Sir Eric,

            Interesting observations. I suppose both homosexuality and the need for authoritarian power indicate a hardened (reprobate) heart. Part of that would be an inability to have empathy, to relate to others on an intimate level, to give without guarantee of return. It is true that some practitioners of homosexuality do have empathy, but not so much those who have many partners. That is all about satisfying the self in the moment, not developing a give and take. I think there is hope if we pray. We serve a God bigger than any sin. 🙂

            Your Highness Miss Gina,
            Don’t discount vengeance born of self-hatred as strong motivator of the authoritarian heart.
            Guy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s